Something to Tell and Share
‘Sir, would you send in the army?’
On 2 Sept 2009, I was one of the guests at a dinner to celebrate the fifth anniversary of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy. During the dialogue session, I asked Minister Mentor a question about a certain possible, though not probable, political scenario that had intrigued me for years. Suppose a freak election took place; what would the PAP do? Would MM send in the army? By way of softening the rather controversial nature of the question, I made sure there was a friendly, humorous preamble. So I addressed MM thus: ‘Some years ago I was giving a talk to some British businessmen, giving my usual spiel about Singapore politics, civic liberties,etc. During the question and answer session,one of the businessmen raised his hand and said, ‘ I’ve a question, or rather a suggestion. Why don’t you give us your Lee Kuan Yew, and we give you in exchange our Tony Blair, with Cherie Blair thrown in?’ I replied, ‘Mr Lee won’t like your noisy, messy, rambunctious democracy.’ He said, ‘No matter’, and went on to remark that if there were but five Lee Kuan Yews scattered throughout Africa, the continent wouldn’t be in such a direful state today. After this light-hearted sharing, I have a question: Sir, in the event of a serious threat of a freak election, would you do the unthinkable, that is, send in the army?’
Reproduced below is the report in The Straits Times the following day on both my question (minus the preamble) and MM’s answer, exemplifying, once again, the hard-headed, no-nonsense PAP pragmatism, and the inimitable trenchancy of style that we have come to associate with Lee Kuan Yew:
AT YESTERDAY’S dialogue, writer Catherine Lim posed MM Lee this question: ‘Sir, in the event of a serious threat of a freak election, would you do the unthinkable, that is, send in the army?’ This is an edited extract from Mr Lee’s reply:
‘You look at our record and the moves we’ve made. Let me put it simply like this. First, we maintain a system which gives any opposition the opportunity to displace us peacefully. We allow the system: we’ve not interfered with the civil service, the judiciary, parliamentary procedures, the police and so on.
If you can win an election, so be it. If at some point we are not able to find a team which can equal an opposition team, on that day we deserve to be out. If we become corrupt, inefficient, can’t deliver, we’re out.
What if we have a freak election, as we may well have? Many voters say openly: ‘In my family, three of us voted for you but two voted against, just to let you know that we want an opposition voice.’ In that situation, you may have a freak result. That worries me.
So we’ve set in place a President with blocking powers. Any opposition that comes in will find that he cannot touch the reserves, otherwise you can promise the sky and spend the money. And all our hard-earned savings will go in five years.
Second, you cannot change the top officials without the President’s consent. Any raiding of the funds must be approved by the President who has a council of presidential advisers to advise him yes or no.
Now, why should we do all these if we expect to overturn an election?
We expect that if we are voted out, to stay out, and hope that within one term, that new government, incompetent and unable to deliver, will be out. And there’s enough core competencies and the funds to enable a fresh PAP government to revive the system.
I spent 15 years thinking about these safeguards and finally persuaded my younger colleagues that we needed these because they can’t guarantee that each time they will produce a better team than the opposition just because you’ve done so in the past.
I don’t see any problem in the next election, and probably the election after that. But if we don’t get a good team in the election after that and the opposition does get a good team together, we’re at risk.
One of the first lessons I learnt in politicswas from Harold Laski. He said if you don’t have a system that allows fundamental change by consent, you will have a revolution by violence. If we block all possibilities, we must expect violence. In that violence, eventually the army won’t shoot because you are in the wrong. That’s what happens in Africa, the army goes in and holds up the president and often shoots him.
If we had not these thoughts at the back of our minds, why do we do these things? Just to bluff the people? Doesn’t make sense. An army commander, air force or police, has to be approved by a committee and the President must agree. Why? Because we will appoint the commanders? No, because a stupid government will do the wrong things and when we return, we may find the whole machinery has collapsed, as often is the case. Simple.
September 3rd, 2009 at 10:50 pm
I think the Britons who commented that a few LKYs would solve the problems in Africa are probably giving him far too much credit.
LKY’s style of governance is probably only applicable to a Chinese-majority, or probably at the most East Asian context. PAP’s success is really very culturally specific; it will probably be far less effective if Singapore remained part of Malaysia, which makes it all the more ironic that the most symbolic imagery of Singapore’s accidental independence is that of LKY sobbing in front of national TV.
September 4th, 2009 at 12:14 am
I think MM Lee here is speaking as a member of PAP, and not as a leader of Singapore.
Meaning, he seperates the two roles.
If he is speaking as a minister, then he would pray that the new government is a good one to keep SG growing , but as a leader of PAP, it is completely in the PAP’s best interests if the new government is weak..
MM Lee For the Win!
September 4th, 2009 at 3:03 am
I believe the old MM has dodged the bullet and he did not give an answer to your question. I can also predict his answer is “yes, if the situation requires me to maintain peace in Singapore, why yes of course”.
Which despot would openly admit he holds the keys to the army and that he will not hesitate to use it to stay in power? If he does not use it, his son certainly will.
How do you judge if the opposition is of sufficient quality to displace the PAP? There is only so much talent in Singapore who qualifies for running for office. Mark these words, soon the FT will be allowed to run for public office too. Why? Because 25% of the inhabitants in Singapore are foreigners and so they need to be represented. And guess what, most or all of these grateful FTs will secure 25% of the valid votes for PAP.
In the most unlikelihood that the opposition can form a majority and form the next government, it is likely the army will be called in or the election votes be doctored. I believe most people in Singapore think this way, and no flowery speech from MM or PM or SM will change that inherent strong belief.
September 4th, 2009 at 10:58 am
Heh, for a youth to want to be a politician very rare…
Kids like me these days are perfectly fine to slack around… You gotta recruit them if not they will not step up to take the baton.. Why should they? National duty? Many will scoff as idealistic, a fairy tale that no one believes in anymore..
they dont even sing the anthem in Sec school.. just stand there cos its the rule.. pledge? orh.. just murmur..
and telling your friends you wanna be the next PM is not a good social move.. confirm mocks and jests.. and you cannot change it, only deal with it..
I will not be surprised if there comes a day we hold elections based not on popular vote, but on results seen ala Singapore Idol style … give each contestant a virtual “singapore” and get them to govern it for a year to even be considered for the position.. if they cant keep a virtual nation alive, neither will the real life nation survive..
September 4th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
It was a simple question and he did not answer it. Just a yes or a no will do. You’d think a trained lawyer would know better.
September 4th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Just what is a freak election? And who is to call it so?
If the people chose a government they didnt want they just have to live with it. Maybe they be better educated then, and such education will be indeed most valuable.
September 4th, 2009 at 11:59 pm
I still do not understand what a freak election is. Worse, I do not understand the answer given by MM Lee to your question.
It is frigging freaky to have the audacity to think that its an aberration if PAP does not govern Singapore.
Unthinkable?
feedmetothefish
September 5th, 2009 at 10:29 am
To be honest, your question reinforces the doubts I have regarding your standing as a “social commentator” in Singapore. Send in the Army ? Who the heck [SAF language toned down here ] do you think constitues the army ? The same people who just threw out the government at the ballot box. Before your question makes sense, you would have to conduct a careful study of the actual balance of power within the SAF (and other paramillitary forces including the police) Would boots-on-the-ground actually obey orders from a coup plotter ? Singapore’s scholar-generals, like our politicians, are not exactly selected for charisma. Even if you assume the existence of some praetorian guard loyal to the old regime, are they numerous enough to prevail against armed and unarmed resistance, consisting of both “conservatives” aghast at an illegal takeover and those who voted against the PAP in the first place ? This type of question just makes you sound like a typical Western journalist air-dropped into what she would breezily describe as a tin-pot dictatorship.
In terms of risks to PAP dominance, the bigger risk is the presidency because it is directly elected and no gerrymandering is possible. It is far more likely that the PAP would lose its control of the president before it loses control of parliament. The question you should have asked, then, is how the PAP intends to retain control of the presidency. Vetting of candidates works only partially because some people still get automatic passes – former Ministers, permanent secretaries’s and CEOs of large companies. If the PAP loses the confidence of this elite, it would have no way of stopping a candidacy from that group. And even among other discretionary candidates, the government would have a hard time stopping a credible candidate.
So bad assumptions on both sides – You don’t seem to understand the actual exercise and limitations of power within the millitary [considering the impact of NS on so many Singaporeans, quite inexcusable for a student of Singapore society] and LKY doesn’t see or doesn’t want to publicly acknowledge the risks posed by his own creation.
September 5th, 2009 at 10:59 am
[...] to Perdition Repression Election: Harry Lee and The Army of Freak Elections – catherinelim.sg: ‘Sir, would you send in the army?’ – Singapore Recalcitrant: A Manifestation of Realism – Today In Singapore: “Sir, Okay To Send In [...]
September 5th, 2009 at 11:02 am
[...] “Sir, in the event of a serious threat of a freak election, would you do the unthinkable, that is, send in the army?” Catherine Lim [...]
September 5th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
The question ought to be, given that the ‘army’ is drawn from the civilian population within a small state, ‘would the army be willing to move against the people in the case of a ‘freak election result’.
One might be able to send the armies of south China against the peoples of north China. But sending the army of south Singapore against the people north Singapore is akin to sending the singapore army against the people in Orchard Road.
September 6th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
I read the reply from Chinese News Paper with ending of LKY asking Catherine Lim about her imagination as a writer that he was lying to Singaporean this was a covered up to extend PAP power!
ha ha. take 15 years to think about!
What they created is an elected president(NO POWER) for only eventual loss of power to pull back.
So How to beat the PAP?
Next, once PAP is out, do you think the grass-root and inner circle got the power to come back, hard as they start to know that most PAP members are in for the money(over paid job) and connection. They will run away and slowly PAP will be just another party.
That is my imagine as a Singaporean, Catherine Lim , the old man just can’t see eye to eye with you!
September 6th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
So LKY is saying the President is a PAP stooge/trojan horse lar?
September 8th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
no need to put in the army.
The ISA / ISD works wonders already. Remember operation cold store, and the Catholic marxist threat? How about the Chinese Chauvinist Threat and million dollar suit. No need army, of course.
September 9th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
Don’t see anything wrong with the way the MM answered the question. It is logical and reasonable enough and as someone said, he speaks it more as a party leader.
Most comment are from the heart, only if we can use our mind more.
September 9th, 2009 at 11:41 pm
Send in the army to suppress the winning side? In Myanmar, yes but Singapore, possible? Ours is a citizen army and if ever such a irrational decision is made to counter a freak election, Singapore as a nation will be doomed for sure…just like Myanmar. In the eyes of many, PAP may have ruled Singapore with an iron fist of sorts which has put Singapore to what she is today, I can say with confidence, no, PAP will not.
September 14th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
His quick-witted reply is just as well-thought-about as the question.
The general tone is that, he won’t send in the army; if he did, the army wouldn’t shoot… but most importantly, he won’t need to send in the army because he has instituted power safeguards (and probably numerous mechanisms to reduce or reverse the freak outcome) to destroy or tie the hands of the winning opposition party.
September 16th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Congratulations on your article today in the IHT. as for your question to the village bully LKY,about sending the army, amazing how he refused to answer directly…poor Singapore to be ruled by such men…
September 16th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
I have had enough of those who think LKY could solve the problems of the world. LKY might be a success in Singapore due to the nature of it’s populace, small size, subservient, unthinking and unquestioning. And that’s it. LKY in any other countries would not be able to resist 5 minutes…He is after all a true dictator.
September 17th, 2009 at 11:54 am
Bravo. I have just landed on your site. Excellent.
September 19th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
I just read the feature about you in The New York Times and followed the link to your site. Very much a fan and will certainly keep checking in to your site!
September 20th, 2009 at 1:24 am
Greetings to Ms.Catherine O Lim,
Its rather interesting that the military option was posed to MM Lee Kuan-Yew the founding father of the post British Starits Settlement of Singapore[ Sri Temasek no less] And the answer although quite intricate has at least a Democratic bottom line of peaceful succession. Its no longer the question of PAP or else ! Be that as it may it must be noted that the post World War II countries in the East Asian Disporic settlements in Malaysia/Singapore needed a strong musculine machismo leadership to bring about change by a consolidated stablization of the British institutions,for nations like Singapore especially to rise from a third rate to a first rate Economic Asian Tiger country,better yet the King of the Beasts the Lion !That’s why we heard rhetorical political florishes like ” knuckle-dusters fist fights” and” punching jaws and pelvis ” In Singapore in the 1950’s of Lee Kuan Yew was that kind of the disporic world of East Asia/South Asia.Most people concede that without strong machismo musculine leadership it couldn’t be achieved! That was then this 21St century holds a different set of changed circumstances,the Question is can the Singapore Lion grow its feminine MER tail so that it can truly be a Merlion at the River’s Mouth and Bandar Berjaya Raya Sri Temasek ? Mrs Lee Kuan Yew[nee Kaw Geok Choo] unfortunately because of the Society Constraints couldn’t be a Hillary Clinton of her tyme !Its the nature and culture of our Asian Community that too has its unique appeal of compelling affection in some circumstances! I seriously think the Lee Kuan Yew Era and his Legacy is secure but will be history because Change is coming all the time in Singapore !Soon we may see more Merlions or Mermaids at the River’s Edge a la Copenhagen ! I am no apologist !Wo Lau La !
Gerald Heng Sr.Esq Boston Chinatown,MA,USA Email:gerryheng@gmail.com
I reside in Framingham,MA, USA
September 21st, 2009 at 10:53 am
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I interpreted your question about the army as a rhetorical one, posed as a barely veiled reference to, or a jibe at, the MM’s support for the Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989 where the troops were called in.
Just a small comment. Have a good day.
September 21st, 2009 at 3:04 pm
Dear Dr Lim Why, pray tell, aren’t you the PM of our country yet?
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:48 pm
First and foremost just let me give a bit of my back ground. I am 51 years old. I am a generation of ‘old and new’ Singapore. I am not highly educated but nontheless I understand who Lee Kuan Yew is and the topic in the debate here.
Lee Kuan Yew is not God. But undeniable he is the making of Singapore as what it is today. By luck? You may ask. Well, to make it simple – what if we are still part of Malaysia? High crime rates and the lately incident involving Anita Sarawak and her husband, not to mention high corruption amongst government officials – this would be our world if not because of him. By chance? I rather we ask ourselves how much effort that he has put in throughout these years.
My next question is – should we be grateful to Lee Kuan Yew? I don’t know about you. For me, I am definitely grateful to him from the bottom of my heart, not because I am someone considerably successful in life (I live in a 4-room flat and have little savings)nor am I a civil servant. I give him full respect for a very simple reason – I can live a comfortable life with safe environment (this also applies to my love ones and yours too) so long as I am willing to hold on to a decent job.
Let me reiterate – he is not God, but he is our forefather, the maker of today’s Singapore. Yes, this man deserves our respect and salute. Thank you, Mr Lee Kuan Yew!!
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:56 pm
My vote will NEVER goes to PAP Be afraid Lee, be very afraid.
October 15th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
we should all be grateful to mr lee and the old guard of the pap for making singapore a success. that is a fact that cannot be disputed.
however, the old guard are no longer running the show (not officially anyway) and the new guard doesn’t seem to be filling in the big shoes well.
power corrupts and 40 years of practically unchallenged rule is long enough to lose track of where you’re going. our society has matured, we don’t need/want to be dictated anymore.
November 9th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
I totally agree with Charlie Teng, my generation were the ones that saw the beginning to its present stage.Cathrine correct me if I am wrong,you like me and quite a number of Malaysians cross the causeway for a better life, why question for publicity or attention sake when you are now enjoying the fruits of Charlie’s generation of simple hardworking not highly educated grateful citizens.Like Charlie I dare say the majority of that generation were not highly educated but thankful that we have LKY and his team to give us a life that others envy or talk about irrespective of the Cabinets salaries of millions per year.I cross the causeway from a country that MPs pocket millions and Ministers and Prime Ministers.$$$…???Cathrine you should know better,like me you too cross the causeway.
November 11th, 2009 at 10:18 am
Gerald Heng Sn. esq.
What happen to your signature “Land of the free & home of the Brave” you are a coward to land in the Land of the free & home of the brave from the home of your birth??? and start throwing stones from afar. Stay like JBJ who went to his grave a brave man fighting for what he believes in right or wrong.Stay like Chee Soon Juan fighting against all odds, brave,silly or otherwise.Cathrine a lady staid and she may face flaks.You????……BRAVE….never in your lifetime
January 17th, 2010 at 12:31 am
[...] hoorde mensen naar adem happen”, zei ze vandaag. In zijn veelzeggende antwoord zei hij met zoveel woorden dat dat niet nodig zou zijn, want het systeem zit zo in elkaar dat een [...]
January 17th, 2010 at 9:15 pm
If any of my commanders give the order to overthrow the gov of the day, I will shoot the commander/s instead!